1. Re: OpenGl again.
Christopher Hickman writes:
> Actually I'm not talking about the arguments used in calling
> a C function, but the return value of the call-back written
> in Euphoria. The sample C Program mr. Martin was coding by used
> call-backs with void returns. Because of call_back()'s
> requirements that the routine_id() pointed to be a function
> and return a 32-bit value, he had to return an arbitrary value
> (zero) in his versions of the the call_back functions. If the
> C function that called the call-back function wasn't expecting
> a return value, could that be the problem?
> Am I making more sense now?
C calling conventions state that a 32-bit return value should be passed
back via a register. If the caller is not expecting a return value, it
will simply ignore the value of the register. There is no danger of
corrupting the stack.
Later,
_______ ______ _______ ______
[ _ \[ _ ][ _ _ ][ _ ]
[/| [_] |[/| [_\][/ | | \][/| [_\]
| ___/ | _] | | | _]
[\| [/] [\| [_/] [\| |/] [\| [_/]
[_____] [______] [_____] [______]
xseal at harborside.com ICQ:13466657
http://www.harborside.com/home/x/xseal/euphoria/
